FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums

Full Version: Can A Person Who Receives Last Rites Still Go To Hell?
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2
If they have unrepentant mortal sin maybe?

What about Anointing of the Sick?
I stand ready for correction, of course, but it seems to me that to worthily and effectively receive any sacrament, except absolution obviously, one must first be in a state of grace. In other words if one has an unabsolved sin for which one is not repentant, the Last Anointing would have no effect, and the Viaticum would be received blasphemously.
I think that "Anointing of the Sick" and "Last Rites" are different ways of naming the same Sacrament.

As for the question, in both instances, absolution of 'all' sin is given to the recipient prior to the Anointing. Now, if the person then, somehow, after the absolution, were to commit a mortal sin, one would assume that hell would be the end result, if they did not receive absolution of that sin before death. There is however, always the option of a possible trip to Purgatory. One never knows until we see Jesus and we go over things before a judgement is made.

That's be my somewhat 'educated' guess.

Tip o' the hat
(04-27-2018, 04:24 PM)jovan66102 Wrote: [ -> ]I stand ready for correction, of course, but it seems to me that to worthily and effectively receive any sacrament, except absolution obviously, one must first be in a state of grace. In other words if one has an unabsolved sin for which one is not repentant, the Last Anointing would have no effect, and the Viaticum would be received blasphemously.

Sacraments are divided various ways but one way is into Sacraments of the Living (5) and Sacraments of the Dead (2).

Sacraments of the living are only fruitful for those who are alive in Sanctifying Grace. Sacraments of the dead are meant to make someone who is spiritually dead and thus lacking Sanctifying Grace to have it and thus be made alive.

Thus the Sacraments of the Living are the Eucharist, Confirmation, Matrimony, Orders and Extreme Unction. Sacraments of the Dead are Baptism and Penance.

Extreme unction however, extraordinarily can be a Sacrament of the Dead.

When one is unable to confess and be properly absolved, but the same degree of contrition was present that would make a confession valid, EU has the same effects as absolution. This is the only logical conclusion from St James 5.14-15 :

Quote:Is any man sick among you? Let him bring in the priests of the church, and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord. And the prayer of faith shall save the sick man: and the Lord shall raise him up: and if he be in sins, they shall be forgiven him.

Thus to receive E.U. while still burdened with mortal sin when one could confess would make it a sacrilegious reception of E.U. (and thus not fruitful). If the man had fallen into a coma, lost his voice or was otherwise truly unable to confess, E.U. would remit all his sins, both venial and mortal.

Still if he recovered he would need to confess those sins (not because they remain unforgiven, but because they have not been properly brought before the ordinary tribunal of the confessional and thus under the power of the keys), as is necessary for anyone whose mortal sins are indirectly forgiven (e.g. you truly forgot one when you confessed).

The problem with Viaticum is that, in order to receive fruitfully one needs to be aware of that reception, desire it and swallow the host or portion of it provided. Without this there is no fruitful reception of the Eucharist. There are no licit means of bringing the Precious Blood to such a person, as It may not be retained after Mass even in a tabernacle.

If those conditions exists, such that a sick, elderly or otherwise dying man can receive, then there is at least some way of making a confession, even if very generic ("are you sorry for all the sins of your whole life. If you are squeeze my hand.") and thus absolution.

Only when a priest would come to a man who is entirely incapable of confessing (which would mean he was also incapable of receiving the Eucharist properly), could he receive E.U. without the State of Grace, and it would be fruitful and he would be forgiven all his sins (if there were contrition before he lost consciousness, for instance).

In such a case a priest would give the Sacrament conditionally, in order to be sure not to confer a sacrilegious Sacrament.
(04-27-2018, 05:27 PM)MagisterMusicae Wrote: [ -> ]In such a case a priest would give the Sacrament conditionally, in order to be sure not to confer a sacrilegious Sacrament.

If the priest could not be sure if the person was repentant, what would the substantive difference be between a priest sacrilegeously administering holy unction to a person was not repentant, and a priest administering it conditionally?  Either way, wouldn't it be fruitful if the person was repentant and unfruitful if unrepentant?  Is there a separate rite for conditional unction that spares the unrepentant person of sacrilege?
There is anecdotal evidence that that is possible.
(04-27-2018, 04:26 PM)Zedta Wrote: [ -> ]I think that "Anointing of the Sick" and "Last Rites" are different ways of naming the same Sacrament.


Tip o' the hat

I hope you don't liook like your avatar! Monkeys are not one of the most lovely creatures the Lord put on Earth, to say the least.. (Sorry, God, if that offends)

so anyway.. you are saying that the sacrament can absolve of un-repented of mortal sin?

I don't think that is true but what i think doesn't matter
The short answer is that yes, it is possible for someone to receive the Last Rites, and still be damned for unrepentant mortal sin, because the primary purpose of the Last Rites is not to absolve sin; this only happens under certain circumstances (i.e. the person is unable to confess). In addition, a person who receives a sacrament of the living while in a state of mortal sin commits a serious sacrilege.
I seriously doubt it. I doubt that most anyone who receives the Last Rites would be willing to play around. In theory, yes I suppose it could happen, but I also think anyone whos willing to receive Anointing of the Sick wouldn't be wanting to play games, honestly.
(04-27-2018, 05:56 PM)Melkite Wrote: [ -> ]If the priest could not be sure if the person was repentant, what would the substantive difference be between a priest sacrilegeously administering holy unction to a person was not repentant, and a priest administering it conditionally?  Either way, wouldn't it be fruitful if the person was repentant and unfruitful if unrepentant?  Is there a separate rite for conditional unction that spares the unrepentant person of sacrilege?

A priest must ensure to the extent reasonably possible that a Sacrament is given fruitfully and validly. This is in order to benefit the recipient, to safeguard the priests' own good, and also to preserve the respect and honor due to the Sacrament.

When there is positive doubt as to whether a Sacrament is able to be given fruitfully or validly, then the priest has to solve this doubt.

That happens in the confessional when a priest has to ask questions to determine if the correct sin has been confessed, how many times, whether they have a sufficient contrition and whether the person is resolve to take the necessary means to try to abandon the sins.

If he is not reasonably sure, for instance, that a man who has been committing adultery for the last 10 years is willing to leave his concubine, then he has to withhold absolution. It would be a grave sin for the priest to give it if he were not so reasonably sure.

So that's the difference. The minister, giving a Sacrament he knows to be invalid or fruitless commits a sin.

Why not just absolve everyone and let God's sort it out? Because while materially the effect may seem the same, in fact there is a great disrespect of the Sacrament involved.

The same happens with E.U.

If the person is actually dead, then the priest cannot administer the Sacrament, but many people appear dead (their heart and bodily functions have stopped on a macroscopic level) and are not actually yet dead (their soul has not yet separated from the body). The priest protects the Sacrament and the dignity due to it by adding a condition in the form :
  • "Si vivis, Per istam Sanctam unctionem et suam Piissimam misericordiam, indulgeat tibi Dominus quidquid deliqui." ("If you be living, then by this holy anointing,  the great goodness of His mercy, may God pardon thee whatever sins thou hast committed."

Or if he is unsure the person is properly disposed, or even he is unsure if they are Catholic (but there is a reasonable chance they could be, e.g. he has a Rosary with him), then he could say :
  • "Si tu es capax, Per istam Sanctam unctionem et suam Piissimam misericordiam, indulgeat tibi Dominus quidquid deliqui." ("If you are so able, then by this holy anointing,  the great goodness of His mercy, may God pardon thee whatever sins thou hast committed.")
Why not just anoint everyone and let God sort it out? Because that would cause disrespect to the Sacrament, and thus sin on the part of the minister.
Pages: 1 2